Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-q99xh Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-27T01:34:18.506Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Undercooling of Liquid Germanium

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  26 February 2011

G. Devaud  and
D. Turnbull
G. Devaud
Affiliation:
Division of Applied Sciences, Harvard University Cambridge, MA 02138
D. Turnbull
Affiliation:
Division of Applied Sciences, Harvard University Cambridge, MA 02138
Get access

Abstract

Small liquid germanium (ℓ-Ge) droplets (0.3–0.5mm diameter) have been undercooled in a B2O3 flux a maximum of 415 ± 20°C below Tm before recalescence. Although the droplets undercooled to temperatures well below the temperature expected for metastable equilibrium with amorphous Ge, Taℓ, the solidified structures were always polycrystalline. There was no evidence of a continuous liquid-to-amorphous transition at or below Taℓ. The nucleation frequency was calculated to be ˜8 × 106 /cm 3-sec at the maximum undercooling. This should be an upper limit to the homogeneous nucleation frequency of the crystal phase since we did not establish that the nucleation was homogeneous in our experiments. However, this limiting I for Ge indicates that homogeneous nucleation of the crystal or amorphous phase would not become appreciable in nsec laser pulsing experiments until ℓ-Ge is undercooled to well below Taℓ. The structure of solidified Ge and Ge/Sn alloy droplets indicates that dendritic growth does not occur in Ge until the liquid is undercooled at least 300°C, and in Ge/Sn until the liquid is undercooled at least 250°C. Greater undercoolings lead to increased dendritic breakup, which results in grain refinement in the final structure.

Type
Research Article
Information
MRS Online Proceedings Library (OPL) , Volume 57: Symposium I – Phase Transitions in Condensed Systems--Experiments and Theory , 1985 , 89
Copyright
Copyright © Materials Research Society 1987

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 Cech, R. E. (1950). Rev. Sci. Instrum. 21, 747.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
2 Clark, G. J., Cullis, A. G., Jacobson, D. C., Poate, J. M., and Thompson, M. O. (1983). MRS Proc. 13, 303.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
3 Devaud, G. and Turnbull, D. (1985). AppL Phys. Lett. 46, 844.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
4 Kui, H. W., Greer, A. L., and Turnbull, D. (1984). Appl. Phys. Lett. 45, 615.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
5 Powell, G. L. F. (1967). Trans. Met. Soc. AIME 239, 1662.Google Scholar
6 Spaepen, F. and Turnbull, D. (1979). AIP Conf. Proc. 50, 73.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
7 Thompson, M. O., Galvin, G. J., Mayer, J. W., Peercy, P. S., Poate, J. M., Jacobson, D. C., Cullis, A. G., and Chew, N. G. (1984). Phys. Rev. Lett. 52, 2360.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
8 Thurmond, C. D. (1956). J. Chem. Phys. 25, 799.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
9 Turnbull, D. and Cech, R. E. (1950). J. Appl. Phys. 21, 804.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
10 Turnbull, D. (1986). MRS Conf. Proc., “Beam-solid Interactions and Phase Transformations”.Google Scholar